Bridget OSullivan

Professor Sheila Fielding

WRTC 103 -0040
February 10th 2016
Gun Control
The topic of gun control is well discussed in todays society and government. Whether
guns are a danger or provide safety in society is heavily debated. There are convincing
arguments on both side of the controversy; on one hand there is an increase in gun violence as
more guns enter the market but people who work to obtain a gun permit tend to be more
responsible than police officers. Writer Jeff Goldberg published the piece Gun Ownership with
Stricter Controls Could Reduce Gun Violence explaining both sides of the argument and trying
to find a middle ground for a solution to this problem. The article came out in 2015 and was
published by Greenhaven Press in Farmington Hills, MI. Goldberg and the [name of PSA] both
offer compelling arguments, but Goldbergs is much more realistic because it gives a solution
where both stances can come to a middle ground.
Throughout the article, Goldberg explains the flaws and strengths of both pro-gun
control and anti-gun control arguments; ultimately, Goldbergs main argument is that gun
violence is a problem in the United States and action needs to be taken to decrease it. He
supports his claim by showing how gun violence is an issue and how producing more guns may
not actually increase gun violence, using numerous pieces of evidence. Goldberg states how the
pro-gun control approach to ban all hand guns is too drastic and unconstitutional for the United
States; and in places like Europe and Canada, there is little to no concealed carry, and gun
violence is exponentially lower compared to the U.S. The intended audience for this piece is all
Americans, but, specifically, it appeals more toward college students. Goldberg goes in depth

about gun violence on college campuses and how universities want their students to handle these
situations. Goldbergs style is persuasive but informative; he uses facts to persuade both pro-gun
control and anti-gun control; however, it seems he wants the reader to be conversational about
this topic, and to take a stand or be active in some form of movement. His argument is organized
topically, by explaining both sides of each argument and then giving his opinion on the matter.
He gradually introduces his stance, using subheadings to guide the reader through the
information he provides, to lead up to his conclusion.
Although Goldberg does not give many of his personal credentials, like his level of
education, but it states that he is a writer for The Atlantic magazine. He does include in-text
citations of where his provided evidence is from; for example, Goldberg provides a brief
introduction of the source and author of it, According to Adam Winkler, a law professor at
UCLA [University of California, Los Angeles] and the author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the
Right to Bear Arms in America, permit holders in the U.S. commit crimes at a rate lower than
that of the general population (20). Goldberg also provides an extensive list of where his
support in his argument is from which contains books, periodicals, and internet sources. He is a
trustworthy writer because not only does he include the credentials of himself and the integrated
sources; but, his argument from the evidence he has drawn from is a good balance for both sides
of the argument.
Throughout his article, Goldberg provides various forms of evidence; whether it is direct
quotes or statistics it is integrate through the whole of the paper. More specifically, he starts the
second paragraph with the statistic According to a 2011 Gallup poll, 47 percent of American
adults keep at least one gun at home or on their property (2). Also, the section of his article, A
Balanced Approach to Gun Violence, contains his personal beliefs. Within this section, he

incorporates additional sources, such as the NRA and Dan Gross; and Goldberg says Gross
believes that closing the gun-show loophole would be both extremely effective and a politically
moderate and achievable goal (52). Goldbergs use of logos is arguably the most effective part
of his article, since it persuades the reader by showing facts and not solely his opinion.
Goldberg does not use much emotion to sway the reader to pick sides. He does not
incorporate much evidence for the reader to feel any form of sadness, anger, or happiness.
Although he does want the reader to pick sides, he wants the reader to be informed and to
understand why his opinion is just. One could argue his chosen statistics of deaths caused by
guns provokes sadness, but these are balanced by more reassuring statistics, such as the National
Crime Victimization Survey, which reported only 108,000 defensive uses of firearms a year
(28). Ultimately, the goal of Goldbergs article is not to make the reader to feel a certain way, but
to think in his perspective.

Alcohol regulation are far too strict compared to gun regulations considering how many
lives are being lost due to gun violence. Gun regulations need to be improved. Bridget
OSullivan
The PSA I created is about the far too strict alcohol regulations in comparison to gun regulations
in the U.S. The main claim of the PSA is to inform the viewers what our society believes should
be considered more dangerous and what should not; the right to have a gun is a constitutional
right but the consumption of alcohol should not have stricter regulations over something than

can end someone life in less than a second. The purpose the PSA conveys an unjust in how
regulations work here in the United States and how something that are taken lightly should not
be and vice versa. The intended audience of the PSA is all Americans, meaning those with and
without an opinion on gun control. The dominant images in the ad are the glass of beer and the
gun while the dominant colors are red and black. Red and black give the piece more intimidation
and seriousness. Overall, the PSA is about weak gun regulations in the U.S.
The logos of the PSA is the most effective part in its argument. The PSA provides some
of the regulation on alcohol as well as gun and it is presented in a way for the viewer to
understand the unjust between the two. The claim of the PSA is clearly stated at the top of the
image in big red letters stating improve gun regulations; then followed by a smaller font size
in black stating that gun regulations should be as strict as alcohol and stricter regulations could
end gun violence. Also the facts provided show the viewer that alcohol arguable poses a larger
threat than gun usage in the U.S. Although the PSA may seem that it is in favor of lowering the
drinking age, but the font color and source integrated show it believes the absurdity between
legally using a gun and legally consuming alcohol. The argument is displayed in a logical order
because the claim is stated at the top and then followed by a side by side comparison then a
quote from the organization Stop Handgun Violence. All in all, the logos in the PSA is design to
convince the viewer the most.
There is not emotion in this PSA, similar to Goldbergs argument, it is not intended for
the audience to feel a certain way but to think a certain way. Although, the PSA is intended for
the audience to decided what is just in this scenario. The images are not very vivid or attention
grabbing because I wanted the audience to focus more on gun violence/regulation and justice;
although, the text is more engaging because of the different colors, and the font. The font I used

was impact because I found it very intimidating and informative compared to other fonts. There
is not much of a personal connection to audience except that the PSA asks the viewer a question.
The qualification of the creator are not stated in the work; but, the creator is an educated
source and is not an authority because their knowledge of gun violence comes from Goldbergs
piece and Stop Handgun Violence. The creator does not demonstrate much respect for other
viewpoints, it is a pro-gun control and including information for the opposite may diminish its
persuasiveness; the organization Stop Handgun Violence is credible and documented properly in
the PSA. The tone of the PSA is suitable for the intended audience because it is very blunt and
aggressive because the creator wants the viewer to understand the ridiculousness behind
government regulations on alcohol and guns. The presentation of the PSA is not very
professional since it was created on Microsoft paint but the presentation of it does not diminish
its claim. The creator does authenticate the organization Stop Handgun Violence in the piece by
properly citing the quotation. Overall the creator of the PSA may not very credible, but the
organization and facts included are credible.
The topic of gun-control has been well discussed in the PSA and in the verbal argument.
While both have different stance on gun control they both recognize how gun violence is a
problem in the U.S.: the PSA is more pro-gun control while Goldbergs argument is more
moderate approach. The PSA adds how Americans tend to value guns more that books even
though they are very dangerous. However the article also explain how people who are more
conservative value their guns a lot, but Goldberg also explains how guns can also be used for
good such as self-defense. Goldbergs argument is more convincing than the PSA because it is
more credible approach and recognized both stances on this issue.

Bridget O'Sullivan
Professor Sheila Fielding
WRTC 103 0040
February 10th 2016
Works Cited Page
1.) Fernandez, Alex. Gun. 2 April 2009. Open Clip Art. Clipart. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.
2.) Goldberg, Jeffrey. "Gun Ownership with Stricter Controls Could Reduce Gun Violence."
Guns and Crime. Ed. Nol Merino. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2015. At
Issue. Rpt. from "The Case for More Guns (and More Gun Control)." Atlantic (Dec.
2012). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 5 Feb. 2016.
3.) United States of America. Stop Handgun Violence. 100,000 AMERICANS DEAD SINCE
SANDY HOOK MASSACRE. By Stop Handgun Violence. Newton, MA: Stop Handgun
Violence, 2016. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.
4.) Xjara69. Glass of Beer. 22 August 2008. Flickr. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.